i tried to share a portion of my thoughts in a video
this is the first video i have ever made (it might be horrible but still...)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq_SPceJ1Cw
I enjoyed your video, but new members are expected to post in the "Introductions" forum first, before starting a new thread elsewhere. It's our way of getting to know you, a little.
Here's a poem I wrote that is similar in tone to your video, in showing nature itself proves God can't be the gentle compassionate, loving being worshiped by Christians.
http://www.solomonzorn.com/vicious.html
I liked it. The robotic voices give it a nice touch. Was this your way of getting around a lack of decent sound equipment, or did you just want to use the robotic voices? Is this robot going to be your online persona, the character you speak through? It would be interesting seeing a robot with self-awareness try to figure out religion. Who knows what would happen then.
Thats what i tried to do
Quote from: Solomon Zorn on September 01, 2016, 08:59:30 PM
I enjoyed your video, but new members are expected to post in the "Introductions" forum first, before starting a new thread elsewhere. It's our way of getting to know you, a little.
Here's a poem I wrote that is similar in tone to your video, in showing nature itself proves God can't be the gentle compassionate, loving being worshiped by Christians.
http://www.solomonzorn.com/vicious.html
Sorry about that i didn't know...
A little too combative for my taste. You'll never convince a believer with that. All you'll do is draw death threats. Maybe rape threats if you're female and attractive. Yeah, their minds actually go there.
And many of your points are easily refuted by even the newly initiated or those who know the Bible only vaguely. Animals killing and eating each other, for instance, is actually address in the Bible. Bad news, it's our fault. Well, not ours, personally. Adam and Eve caused it. And they were the first humans, so all of humanity is at fault. Natural disasters? That didn't happen in the garden either. So by extension we can assume that's our fault too. And God didn't make "the universe" for life. That's what the Earth is for. We're special. We're also stupid and evil and vile, but special.
Quote from: widdershins on September 02, 2016, 10:55:39 AM
A little too combative for my taste. You'll never convince a believer with that. All you'll do is draw death threats. Maybe rape threats if you're female and attractive. Yeah, their minds actually go there.
And many of your points are easily refuted by even the newly initiated or those who know the Bible only vaguely. Animals killing and eating each other, for instance, is actually address in the Bible. Bad news, it's our fault. Well, not ours, personally. Adam and Eve caused it. And they were the first humans, so all of humanity is at fault. Natural disasters? That didn't happen in the garden either. So by extension we can assume that's our fault too. And God didn't make "the universe" for life. That's what the Earth is for. We're special. We're also stupid and evil and vile, but special.
And of course, made in God's image.
Quote from: SGOS on September 02, 2016, 12:31:54 PM
And of course, made in God's image.
Yet nothing like him. When it's convenient, of course.
after all, it just a sample experiment. I will be sure to make it look good next time.
Quote from: RocketLauncher13 on September 02, 2016, 12:55:09 PM
after all, it just a sample experiment. I will be sure to make it look good next time.
Not in any way saying there was anything wrong with it. You just might want to decide who you're preaching to. To us? Then it was great. Are you actually trying to make a point to the believer? WAY too militant to be effective.
Mary Poppins is real ... a spoonful of sugar does help the medicine go down ;-)
Quote from: widdershins on September 02, 2016, 10:55:39 AM
A little too combative for my taste. You'll never convince a believer with that. All you'll do is draw death threats. Maybe rape threats if you're female and attractive. Yeah, their minds actually go there.
And many of your points are easily refuted by even the newly initiated or those who know the Bible only vaguely. Animals killing and eating each other, for instance, is actually address in the Bible. Bad news, it's our fault. Well, not ours, personally. Adam and Eve caused it. And they were the first humans, so all of humanity is at fault. Natural disasters? That didn't happen in the garden either. So by extension we can assume that's our fault too. And God didn't make "the universe" for life. That's what the Earth is for. We're special. We're also stupid and evil and vile, but special.
The thing is that Christians think they can have it both ways. What's evidence that God exists? Look at how perfectly fine tuned our universe is to support life on Earth! Evidence for why we need a Savior? Look at how broken our world is! You can't have it both ways. Either the world is incredibly flawed or it is beautifully designed. This kind of double-think is common for people of faith.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 03, 2016, 03:09:15 AM
The thing is that Christians think they can have it both ways. What's evidence that God exists? Look at how perfectly fine tuned our universe is to support life on Earth! Evidence for why we need a Savior? Look at how broken our world is! You can't have it both ways. Either the world is incredibly flawed or it is beautifully designed. This kind of double-think is common for people of faith.
That double standard is the foundation upon which belief is built. Your one example is just a drop in the ocean. It's in their every argument. Without double standards their entire belief system falls apart. Look at Randy's arguments. One expert who agreed with him was worth more than any number of experts who didn't. One source he liked outweighed any and all sources he didn't, regardless which was more credible. And look at the "uncaused cause" argument. No matter how far you go back it is IMPOSSIBLE in their minds that the "first cause" be not-God because reason after reason, but all those reasons go away when you argue that God must then have had a creator. And the Bible itself is evidence that Christianity is true and real, as is any text, ancient or young, which supports their beliefs, but no text which does not is credible in any way. One is stupid both for not believing in their particular God as they see him AND for believing in any other god in any form.
Christians DO have it both ways, in their heads anyway. They always have and they always will.
I happen to agree .. the uncaused cause could be impersonal or personal. Aristotle took it to be impersonal. Also his categories of causation are misused ... one cause is ... the carpenter cut the wood ... but that doesn't mean that every cause must end up at a personal source ... there were cases that Aristotle noted, where the cause was purely natural, like the growth of the tree that the wood is cut from .. for example. He didn't believe in wood nymphs.
Personally, I don't have a problem with infinite regress, or other forms of infinity. Zeno of Elea had that problem 2500 years ago, but I don't have to agree with him that infinite regress is a reductio ad absurbum .. so I don't need planck lengths to avoid meltdown of modern physics either. Ancient Greeks didn't even believe in the whole real number line, and no zero and no negative numbers. If they had arithmetic like 1900 CE ... they might have done their metaphysics better (as analogy to math). They only had positive, non-zero rational numbers ... the numerator and denominator had to be non-negative non-zero integers ... and they didn't have Cantor's infinities either.
Quote from: widdershins on September 06, 2016, 04:33:04 PM
Look at Randy's arguments.
Ahh, remembering Randy. He would make a good salesman with all his clever tricks. I remember my first encounter. He quoted some article that claimed that while no one piece of evidence could prove the existence of God, a whole bunch may very well accomplish this. This was an interesting thought that I had never heard before, and I considered that maybe separate evidences could be combined somehow in sequitur fashion to arrive at a proof. But it was a trick. The operative word in the claim was that MAY very well accomplish this. Fair enough. It may, I suppose, and I was open to how.
But by the time he was finished, his attention grabber changed from MAY very well, to "Yes, it does unequivocally," based on his opener that it very well may. Not sure how he got from one to the other. He just sort of ended up there when no one was looking. And he bolstered his point with, although his presentation provide no viable proofs, it was evidence that a court of law would find compelling. First, we have no idea what a court of law with lay jurors would find compelling, and while evidence was provided, none of it approached proof. Apparently, evidence becomes proof when he says there is enough that a court of law would accept it, even though a court of law was not utilized in any way in his debate.
Yeah, he could probably sell ice to Eskimos, although they may still experience buyer's remorse.
Great vid, I liked it a lot. It was short and to the point. Too bad you couldn't make the voice sound like Hawking, but I guess we can't have everything, huh? I wonder if Hawking's voice is copyrighted, or something...
I guess Christians attribute all the horrible cruelty in the natural world to Eve having eaten the fucking fruit. Before then all the animals either didn't have to eat, or at least didn't eat each other.
I wouldn't have anything at all to do with anyone who truly believed that silliness. I don't believe anyone really does believe it, though.
Per Randy ... casuistry is taught in Catholic seminaries.
Quote from: Baruch on September 06, 2016, 06:55:25 PM
Per Randy ... casuistry is taught in Catholic seminaries.
Just for clarification did he actually say that, or does the church actually teach it?
cas·u·ist·ry
/ˈkaZHÉ™wÉ™strÄ"/
noun: casuistry; plural noun: casuistries
the use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions; sophistry.
synonyms: sophistry, specious reasoning, speciousness, sophism, equivocation
Quote from: widdershins on September 06, 2016, 04:33:04 PM
That double standard is the foundation upon which belief is built. Your one example is just a drop in the ocean. It's in their every argument. Without double standards their entire belief system falls apart. Look at Randy's arguments. One expert who agreed with him was worth more than any number of experts who didn't. One source he liked outweighed any and all sources he didn't, regardless which was more credible. And look at the "uncaused cause" argument. No matter how far you go back it is IMPOSSIBLE in their minds that the "first cause" be not-God because reason after reason, but all those reasons go away when you argue that God must then have had a creator. And the Bible itself is evidence that Christianity is true and real, as is any text, ancient or young, which supports their beliefs, but no text which does not is credible in any way. One is stupid both for not believing in their particular God as they see him AND for believing in any other god in any form.
Christians DO have it both ways, in their heads anyway. They always have and they always will.
Hell, many even believe that God is both one and THREE at the same time. How does this make sense? They don't know. They don't even try to explain it. They just believe it.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 06, 2016, 09:44:20 PM
Hell, many even believe that God is both one and THREE at the same time. How does this make sense? They don't know. They don't even try to explain it. They just believe it.
Well he's like Batman: sometimes he's Batman, and sometimes he's Bruce Wayne. He's two and one at the same time. Same thing with God: sometimes he's God, sometimes he's Jesus, and the rest of the time he's Casper the Holy Ghost.
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on September 07, 2016, 01:57:32 AM
Well he's like Batman: sometimes he's Batman, and sometimes he's Bruce Wayne. He's two and one at the same time. Same thing with God: sometimes he's God, sometimes he's Jesus, and the rest of the time he's Casper the Holy Ghost.
Some apparently try to use the "trinity of trinities" to justify the Holy Trinity. Time, space, and matter come in three forms, and yet are one. So why not God?
(http://www.aocibibletraininginstitute.org/2-1-2-TrinityAnalogy.png)
Well, first of all, matter has four states, not three. The fourth is plasma. Second, out of these three, only one actually exists: matter. Time and space are just measurements. God is not claimed to be a measurement, but a real person. Third, even if matter did have only three forms, they could only be one at once. You will never find an object that is a solid, liquid, and gas at the same time. It has to be one or the other. Yet they claim that God is three persons at once, but he's not three separate gods.
Oh, shit. I just made a trinity. Umm... Well, I guess that means that God really is three and one.
EDIT: Oh yeah. And I believe that space is believed to have more than four dimensions as well. Something to do with quarks or quantum strings or whatever. So space may not even be a trinity either.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 06, 2016, 09:44:20 PM
Hell, many even believe that God is both one and THREE at the same time. How does this make sense? They don't know. They don't even try to explain it. They just believe it.
I think that concept is a way to make God mysterious and beyond understanding. It is such an alien concept to us, so impossible for us to understand that when you try to comprehend it God simply looks more powerful and mysterious, beyond our understanding. It's a way to distance him from us.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 07, 2016, 02:52:34 AM
Some apparently try to use the "trinity of trinities" to justify the Holy Trinity. Time, space, and matter come in three forms, and yet are one. So why not God?
(http://www.aocibibletraininginstitute.org/2-1-2-TrinityAnalogy.png)
Well, first of all, matter has four states, not three. The fourth is plasma. Second, out of these three, only one actually exists: matter. Time and space are just measurements. God is not claimed to be a measurement, but a real person. Third, even if matter did have only three forms, they could only be one at once. You will never find an object that is a solid, liquid, and gas at the same time. It has to be one or the other. Yet they claim that God is three persons at once, but he's not three separate gods.
Oh, shit. I just made a trinity. Umm... Well, I guess that means that God really is three and one.
EDIT: Oh yeah. And I believe that space is believed to have more than four dimensions as well. Something to do with quarks or quantum strings or whatever. So space may not even be a trinity either.
Ah, but had you considered THIS?
(https://s14.postimg.org/ehb8j9tn5/iwin.jpg)
When arranged thusly, this proof of the trinity, itself being a trinity of trinities, in the shape of a triangle, it greatly resembles the Triforce, being a THIRD TRINITY! Now we have a trinity of trinity of trinities! Explain THAT with your science!
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 07, 2016, 02:52:34 AMWell, first of all, matter has four states, not three. The fourth is plasma.
That's a simplified version, which is useful for cooking. But it gets way more complex than that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_of_matter
Quote from: SGOS on September 06, 2016, 07:25:25 PM
Just for clarification did he actually say that, or does the church actually teach it?
cas·u·ist·ry
/ˈkaZHÉ™wÉ™strÄ"/
noun: casuistry; plural noun: casuistries
the use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions; sophistry.
synonyms: sophistry, specious reasoning, speciousness, sophism, equivocation
Look it up. But Randy would never admit this, his hierarchy is saintly. Lying for the faith, and using un-reason ... have been self-acknowledged policy ... for many centuries now. Though the Jesuits in the 1500s gave it new juice. They inherited this from the secular Greeks of Socrates' day. Being a Sophist is how you project you are a sophisticate at those homo-erotic symposia (cocktail parties). Read both .. the one by Plato and the one by Xenophon. It is Internet trolling ... without the Internet, but with naked boys and lots of wine.
Quote from: widdershins on September 07, 2016, 11:13:14 AM
Ah, but had you considered THIS?
(https://s14.postimg.org/ehb8j9tn5/iwin.jpg)
When arranged thusly, this proof of the trinity, itself being a trinity of trinities, in the shape of a triangle, it greatly resembles the Triforce, being a THIRD TRINITY! Now we have a trinity of trinity of trinities! Explain THAT with your science!
There's also the trinity of quark generations, u-d, s-c, t-b. I just found out that
quarks may not be fundamental particles (http://www.ccaesar.com/eng_quark_theory.html).
The number 3 seems to be embedded many places in our cosmic structure (http://futureandcosmos.blogspot.com/2014/01/nature-seems-to-love-number-three.html)
Quote from: Baruch on September 07, 2016, 06:08:58 PM
But Randy would never admit this, his hierarchy is saintly. Lying for the faith, and using un-reason ... have been self-acknowledged policy ... for many centuries now.
Well, I assume they teach apologetics, so why not casuistry? Introduction and advanced.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 07, 2016, 02:52:34 AM
Some apparently try to use the "trinity of trinities" to justify the Holy Trinity. Time, space, and matter come in three forms, and yet are one. So why not God?
(http://www.aocibibletraininginstitute.org/2-1-2-TrinityAnalogy.png)
Well, first of all, matter has four states, not three. The fourth is plasma. Second, out of these three, only one actually exists: matter. Time and space are just measurements. God is not claimed to be a measurement, but a real person. Third, even if matter did have only three forms, they could only be one at once. You will never find an object that is a solid, liquid, and gas at the same time. It has to be one or the other. Yet they claim that God is three persons at once, but he's not three separate gods.
Oh, shit. I just made a trinity. Umm... Well, I guess that means that God really is three and one.
EDIT: Oh yeah. And I believe that space is believed to have more than four dimensions as well. Something to do with quarks or quantum strings or whatever. So space may not even be a trinity either.
If you have a solid, liquid, and gas all next to each other at the same time are all three still matter?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Kaleb5000 on September 07, 2016, 10:00:04 PM
If you have a solid, liquid, and gas all next to each other at the same time are all three still matter?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Have you ever seen a single object that was simultaneously a solid, liquid, and a gas all at once? No. But even if you did, it wouldn't make the Holy Trinity any less ridiculous.
You and I are not the same person, but we are both human. Are we two in one? Are we one human, two persons?
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 08, 2016, 03:05:30 AM
Have you ever seen a single object that was simultaneously a solid, liquid, and a gas all at once? No. But even if you did, it wouldn't make the Holy Trinity any less ridiculous.
You and I are not the same person, but we are both human. Are we two in one? Are we one human, two persons?
Is the trinity a single object?
No we are not two in one. We are individuals. This question is irrelevant. This is not a good comparison to the other examples given in this thread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Unbeliever on September 07, 2016, 07:27:35 PM
There's also the trinity of quark generations, u-d, s-c, t-b. I just found out that quarks may not be fundamental particles (http://www.ccaesar.com/eng_quark_theory.html).
The number 3 seems to be embedded many places in our cosmic structure (http://futureandcosmos.blogspot.com/2014/01/nature-seems-to-love-number-three.html)
The human brain is very, very good at spotting patterns, even when no pattern exists.
Quote from: Unbeliever on September 07, 2016, 07:27:35 PM
...
The number 3 seems to be embedded many places in our cosmic structure
So are the numbers 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6, among others.
Quote from: Kaleb5000 on September 08, 2016, 06:33:33 AM
Is the trinity a single object?
He's a single god, although he is also three separate "persons." So he is both one person and three persons at the same time. Hence my question.
Quote from: Kaleb5000 on September 08, 2016, 06:33:33 AMNo we are not two in one. We are individuals. This question is irrelevant. This is not a good comparison to the other examples given in this thread.
It's no more irrelevant than the example of states of matter, or three places in time, or the three dimensions of space. No matter what example you give, you cannot make sense out of the Holy Trinity. There is nothing in the world that is similar to the concept of one person being three. Even if you cloned someone twice, each clone would still be their own individual.
This Holy Trinity speaks to himself, withhold information from itself, has different personalities (the Holy Spirit being the least willing to forgive, Jesus actually giving a fuck about people's problems enough to fix them), and yet they are not three separate gods. No, they're one... How does that make any sense?
Quote from: widdershins on September 08, 2016, 09:52:53 AM
The human brain is very, very good at spotting patterns, even when no pattern exists.
False patterns, if often occurring, are still useful. See classical physics.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 08, 2016, 03:05:30 AM
Have you ever seen a single object that was simultaneously a solid, liquid, and a gas all at once? No. But even if you did, it wouldn't make the Holy Trinity any less ridiculous.
You and I are not the same person, but we are both human. Are we two in one? Are we one human, two persons?
At the triple point, at a certain pressure and temperature, water exists as gas, liquid and solid at the same time and place. Checkmate!
Quote from: Kaleb5000 on September 08, 2016, 06:33:33 AM
Is the trinity a single object?
No we are not two in one. We are individuals. This question is irrelevant. This is not a good comparison to the other examples given in this thread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Psychology says we are not individuals ... we are a community of personalities, that sometimes share the same consensus!
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 08, 2016, 06:34:23 PM
He's a single god, although he is also three separate "persons." So he is both one person and three persons at the same time. Hence my question.
It's no more irrelevant than the example of states of matter, or three places in time, or the three dimensions of space. No matter what example you give, you cannot make sense out of the Holy Trinity. There is nothing in the world that is similar to the concept of one person being three. Even if you cloned someone twice, each clone would still be their own individual.
This Holy Trinity speaks to himself, withhold information from itself, has different personalities (the Holy Spirit being the least willing to forgive, Jesus actually giving a fuck about people's problems enough to fix them), and yet they are not three separate gods. No, they're one... How does that make any sense?
Why must you be so aggressive and swear like you do? I can't take you serious when talk the way you do. I'm just having a conversation. Why the anger?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Baruch on September 08, 2016, 06:57:45 PM
Psychology says we are not individuals ... we are a community of personalities, that sometimes share the same consensus!
I would say we are individuals who are similar to other individuals.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Kaleb5000 on September 08, 2016, 08:02:54 PMWhy must you be so aggressive and swear like you do? I can't take you serious when talk the way you do. I'm just having a conversation. Why the anger?
(http://i.imgur.com/j1kOG3Q.jpg)
There's also plasma, like stars and other hot stuff.
Also a lump of matter CAN be in 3 states at once, it's called its triplepoint.
Sendt fra min SM-G920F med Tapatalk
Quote from: Kaleb5000 on September 08, 2016, 08:02:54 PM
Why must you be so aggressive and swear like you do? I can't take you serious when talk the way you do. I'm just having a conversation. Why the anger?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How to Dodge Logic Like a Pro, by Kaleb5000
Kaleb doesn't need logic, to build an argument. After all, engineers don't need to measure, when designing a airliner. They can just eyeball it. I'm sure it will be just as good.
Quote from: Solomon Zorn on September 09, 2016, 01:19:05 PM
Kaleb doesn't need logic, to build an argument. After all, engineers don't need to measure, when designing a airliner. They can just eyeball it. I'm sure it will be just as good.
They would get better results if they were to pray that the measurements were all good.
Quote from: widdershins on September 09, 2016, 01:47:14 PM
They would get better results if they were to pray that the measurements were all good.
Of course they won't test the airliner themselves, or else they might get killed or something. After all maybe they didn't pray hard enough.
Quote from: Solomon Zorn on September 09, 2016, 01:19:05 PM
Kaleb doesn't need logic, to build an argument. After all, engineers don't need to measure, when designing a airliner. They can just eyeball it. I'm sure it will be just as good.
Worked for Terydactyl Airlines on the Flintstones ;-)
Quote from: Absurd Atheist on September 09, 2016, 06:19:45 PM
Of course they won't test the airliner themselves, or else they might get killed or something. After all maybe they didn't pray hard enough.
Lots of passengers pray on airlines, during or not during air turbulence. Don't laugh, unless you bring your own barf bag.
Quote from: Blackleaf on September 07, 2016, 02:52:34 AM
Well, first of all, matter has four states, not three. The fourth is plasma. Second, out of these three, only one actually exists: matter. Time and space are just measurements. God is not claimed to be a measurement, but a real person. Third, even if matter did have only three forms, they could only be one at once. You will never find an object that is a solid, liquid, and gas at the same time. It has to be one or the other. Yet they claim that God is three persons at once, but he's not three separate gods.
Oh, shit. I just made a trinity. Umm... Well, I guess that means that God really is three and one.
EDIT: Oh yeah. And I believe that space is believed to have more than four dimensions as well. Something to do with quarks or quantum strings or whatever. So space may not even be a trinity either.
I think matter has seven states now, including Bose-Einstein condensates, quark-gluon plasmas, and neutron-degenerate matter, but those are all rather extreme states under specialized conditions.
Hmmm... seven states... seven days to create the World...
And I think the current state of string theory implies space is ten- or eleven-dimensional but the extra six or seven are curled up into Calabi-Yau manifolds on the sub-subatomic level.
Hmmm... ten dimensions... ten commandments...
I think the broader point is that humans are supreme pattern matchers. Or, as Robert Anton Wilson put it when discussing the so-called '23 Enigma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/23_enigma)', "When you start looking for something you tend to find it."
Quote from: trdsf on September 10, 2016, 03:13:47 PM
I think matter has seven states now, including Bose-Einstein condensates, quark-gluon plasmas, and neutron-degenerate matter, but those are all rather extreme states under specialized conditions.
Hmmm... seven states... seven days to create the World...
And I think the current state of string theory implies space is ten- or eleven-dimensional but the extra six or seven are curled up into Calabi-Yau manifolds on the sub-subatomic level.
Hmmm... ten dimensions... ten commandments...
I think the broader point is that humans are supreme pattern matchers. Or, as Robert Anton Wilson put it when discussing the so-called '23 Enigma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/23_enigma)', "When you start looking for something you tend to find it."
So what you're telling me is that my grade school education was a complete waste of time.
Grade school probably got you into high school. Beyond that I have no idea.